Hundreds of thousands of peaceful protesters took to the streets of Hong Kong Tuesday in protest of the anti-subversion law that the mainland Chinese Communist government is attempting to impose. Cynics might say they are undermining their own case — if freedom in Hong Kong is so imperiled, how were so many people able to engage in a political protest? We see it differently — the fact that so many Hong Kong residents were willing to turn out in protest of the law is a sign that they understand the seriousness of the risks to their liberties that are posed by the Chinese communists now ruling their territory.

The British handover of Hong Kong to the Chinese in 1997 was supposed to mark the beginning of a “one country, two systems” approach. Implementing the anti-subversion law, as the U.S. Commission on International Religious Freedom put it this week, “not only contravenes international understandings regarding the principle of ‘one country, two systems,’ but also signals a regression in Hong Kong’s overall political development and respect for human rights.” A resolution on the issue sponsored by Rep. Christopher Cox that recently passed the House of Representatives notes that mainland China’s “history of arbitrary application of its own criminal law against dissenters, and its pattern of imprisoning and exiling those with whom it disagrees, provide strong reasons to oppose the expansion of Beijing’s ability to use its discretion against Hong Kong’s freedoms.”

Plenty of Americans will be watching to see what happens in Hong Kong. There’s no doubt that the liberties of the former colony’s 7 million residents are worth preserving. But even the resolution of Mr. Cox, who is relatively strong on the issue, does little more than “urge” and “call upon.” A June 19 statement by the White House press secretary can be read to suggest that the Chinese moves might bring American trade penalties on Hong Kong, but in general, the leadership in Washington doesn’t seem inclined to use either sanctions or the threat of military force to defend Hong Kong’s freedoms. It is too afraid of angering China.

But the Communist regime in China is not going to be around forever. What a day it would be if hundreds of thousands took to the streets of Beijing to protest the political freedoms they now lack, the very freedoms the residents of Hong Kong are clinging to with such dignity and determination. A sagacious article by Arthur Waldron, just out in the July–August issue of Commentary, predicts that such a day will come, but that the free world will be unprepared: “Foreign businesses will panic at the potential loss of investments, neighboring allies will panic at the prospects of refugees and violence; the State Department will be stumped when it comes to dealing with competing regional authorities, or with Tibetan or Uighur independence.”

The sooner the demonstrations for freedom spread to mainland China, the more likely it is that Hong Kong’s particular fears are addressed. The best thing America could do to promote freedom in Hong Kong, in the long run, is to do what it can to promote the forces of democracy on the mainland.